The VAXXED team recently interviewed a mother from New Jersey, now living in Florida, about her vaccine-damaged son. Her son has brain injuries, and initially she was accused of Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS). They removed her other child from her home, and tried to get her to confess to a crime she never committed.
Her son almost died, and at one point they encouraged her and her husband to just donate his organs.
But he pulled through, and with the use of alternative therapies such as hyperbaric oxygen therapy and medical cannabis (CBD oil), he has seen significant improvement.

As the medical profession continues to debate the merits of "Shaken baby syndrome" (SBS), the American judicial system is increasingly determining that the evidence against SBS is strong enough to prevent convictions in a court of law, where the standard is "reasonable doubt."
As Christina England reports, Chief Justice Ralph Gants from the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts just ruled this month that another SBS case in Massachusetts must be re-tried, because evidence contrary to the supposed "science" behind SBS was not presented at the trial. Judge Gants even went beyond just issuing a ruling to provide legal advice to attorneys seeking to represent their clients against SBS claims.
So now the question remains: if these parents have had their children removed illegally, and many of these parents have wrongly been convicted and incarcerated, should doctors who are responsible for these injustices be tried in a court of law for their crimes?
An important case was heard last year in the Ninth Circuit Court, which ruled that Dr. Claudia Wang, the medical director of UCLA’s Suspected Child Abuse and Negligence (SCAN) team, does not have immunity from civil lawsuits, may have set an important legal precedent.